Total Pageviews

Monday, February 2, 2015

The Peculiar Cult of the Old-Fashioned Shave

A strange new obsession is lurking in the gilded halls of the internet:  the old-fashioned shave. 

Groups of uber-manly men gather together on their preferred forums (most notably on sites like Badger and Blade and The Shave Den) and chatter endlessly about how amazing their respective shaves are now that they have loosed the yoke placed upon them by the spawn of Satan (meaning Gillette).  The modern cartridge razor, they say, is a subpar instrument for removing the hair from one's face (or head, or legs, or other parts I don't care to know about), so these wizened sages of the depilatory arts have returned to the methods of our fathers and grandfathers:  the double-edged safety razor.  In some more extreme cases, these folks have reverted to the use of a straight razor (appropriately dubbed a "cut-throat" in other countries).

Common assertions by new recruits into the fold are "I don't dread shaving anymore!" (You dreaded shaving?  I don't really care for it, but I don't wake up in the morning praying that an asteroid will end life on earth before I have to place that unholy instrument of torture to my face), "It's a fun hobby!" (It's good to have a hobby...shaving is a strange one), and "Real men shave this way!" (Because it's only common sense that one's manliness is determined by the method by which one removes the hair from one's face). 

Before going any further, I should probably provide some background.  At one time, men used straight razors to shave.  This particular type of blade could theoretically last forever if maintained.  It had to be sharpened, and then stropped and honed on a strip of leather (appropriately called a "strop") before each use.  There were obvious hazards associated with putting a piece of insanely sharp steel next to one's throat, especially considering one's jugular is only about one and a half centimeters below the skin in the average person.  So, a new razor was developed.  Some preliminary designs were produced in the nineteenth century, but the safety razor was finally perfected by King Camp Gillette in 1901.  The new razor used a thin, double-edged razor blade that sat at a ninety-degree angle to the handle.  It was placed inside a guard that only left a small fraction of the blade exposed.  The blade had to be held at about a thirty-degree angle so that the blade could remove the whiskers.  The blade was thrown out and replaced when it lost its ability to cut without taking off a significant amount of flesh.  With both the straight razor and safety razor, men typically used shaving creams and soaps that had to be whipped into a lather using a shaving brush, usually in a mug. 

This was the preferred method of shaving until the Gillette Trac II was introduced in 1971.  It featured two blades on a disposable cartridge that would be discarded once it became dull.  In 1998, and after $750 million in research and development costs, Gillette began producing the Mach 3 razor.  As the name suggests, this cartridge had three blades, as well as a lubricating strip to help reduce irritation and help the head glide across the skin.  Finally, the Gillette Fusion and it's numerous incarnations arrived in 2006.  It featured five blades and a single-blade trimmer on top to shave around one's sideburns.  To this date, this is still the most popular razor in the world.

Practitioners of the traditional wet-shave, as it's called, assert that cartridge razors provide an inadequate shave that needlessly irritates the skin and causes razor burn.  They say modern cartridges are insanely overpriced (on this, I agree with them).  Double-edged razors can be purchased at a cost of about $0.10 apiece, while most cartridges run in the $3-$4 range.  Modern canned shaving creams, they assert, have propellants in them that dry out the skin.  Old alcohol-based aftershaves like Pinaud Clubman and Old Spice are superior because...well, no one ever really says (though I do find it interesting that so many of them advocate using these alcohol-based aftershaves, while at the same time fretting over the propellants in the shaving cream drying out their skin).  To them, everything about modern shaving technology is subpar compared to the methods employed by our forebearers. 

If one visits the forums frequented by the users of these old-timey products, it becomes fairly obvious that the practice of traditional wet-shaving has devolved into a cult.  If anyone dares say that they get a perfectly good shave using modern razors and creams, they are thoroughly lambasted and insulted by the elitist shaving snobs.  They are told that they simply haven't put in enough time to learn the technique of getting a proper DE (their anagram, along with silliness like BBS, which stands for "baby's butt smooth") shave.  They are told that "real men" shave with a safety razor and God help them if they commit an act of heresy like using a cartridge razor.  You also have the usual idiots trolling these forums who like to throw in their two cents by saying "real men don't shave." 

After having been convinced that using a safety razor was the true measure of a man by a website I now infrequently visit called The Art of Manliness, I decided to try it for myself.  I started out shaving using my dad's Trac II.  When I graduated high school in 2000, the army sent me a Mach 3, which became my razor of choice (and I didn't even join the army).  Then, I made the switch to the Gillette Fusion when it was released.  I never had a huge problem with any of these razors.  The Mach 3 and Fusion sometimes caused razor burn on my neck because my hair grows at weird angles, but I have now determined that my unwillingness to change the cartridge often enough due to the high price likely contributed to that particular problem.  However, I was convinced that I was missing out on some manly ritual that all of my peers (and most other older adults I know) were ignorant to.  So I made the leap.

About two years ago, I went on Amazon and purchased a Merkur long-handled safety razor (it was supposed to be a better fit for men with large hands because many safety razors are pretty short), a cake of Proraso shaving soap (no need for a mug since you create the lather in the tub that the cake sits in), a badger hair brush, and some Merkur double-edged blades.  I was excited to try out my new purchases when they finally arrived.  I had little trouble getting a good lather from the soap, and the scent was great.  When I finally put razor to face the results were...underwhelming, to say the least.  I realized, though I had read it on many forums, that this was going to be no quick undertaking.  Gone were the days of slathering shaving cream on my face and shaving away the whiskers in five minutes' time.  Using a safety razor requires at least three passes with the razor, along with three applications of shaving cream, to remove all the hair.  So I kept at it, hoping that my results would improve as I became more adept at the practice.  Alas, as much as I tried to convince myself that I was getting a good shave with the safety razor, in the back of my mind I knew that it was inferior to the quick, smooth, effortless shave I got from my Gillette Fusion. Granted, some of the bells and whistles that have been added to the Gillette Fusion (like a vibrating head) are a bit of an overkill.  However, I could go against the grain on my neck with the Fusion and barely feel the razor whisking the whiskers away, whereas with the safety razor, it felt like a disgruntled rancher dragging rusty barbed-wire across my throat, even after two previous passes with the razor to reduce the growth to a manageable level.  After a year and a half of practicing and trying to convince myself of something I knew to not be true, I gave up.

So am I saying that the safety razor is wrong for everyone?  Nope.  There are certainly people out there who may get a perfectly adequate shave with a safety razor.  I'm not one of them.  There are people out there who may enjoy the old-fashioned ritual.  I'm not one of them.  There is nothing inherently masculine in the way a man chooses to remove the hair from his face.  I'm a fairly nostalgic person, but I don't delude myself into thinking all the practices of yesteryear are better than the way we do things today.  I choose to not romanticize shaving in the same way I choose to not romanticize outhouses or smallpox (indoor plumbing and vaccines are great).  The Art of Manliness states that if one uses a safety razor, one will be participating in a manly ritual that people like Teddy Roosevelt and JFK participated in.  Nevermind the fact that Teddy Roosevelt was an imperialist and JFK was a notorious philanderer.  They both certainly had good qualities, but the way they shaved is irrelevant. 

I also find it curious that, if the safety razor truly is superior to modern shaving implements, more older men don't continue to use them.  Many of the shaving snobs will say that a massive ad campaign designed by the Gillette company to create an environment where people had to buy overpriced razors is responsible for this.  I find this argument ridiculous.  If modern razors weren't truly superior, men would not have switched.  One theoretically painful swipe of the razor would've told them that these new-fangled razors were junk and they would've promptly returned to their trusty safety razors.

As I said earlier, razor cartridges have become ridiculously overpriced.  I shudder to think of the markup and the profit that companies like Gillette and Schick bring in.  However, the cartridges last considerably longer than what is recommended on the package.  I've comfortably used a Gillette Fusion cartridge for over a month and I have a fairly coarse beard.  The cost is still considerably higher than the double-edged blades that can be purchased in bulk on Amazon.  The point, though, is that using a safety or straight razor (or growing a beard) is not manly in any way.  If you can get a good shave with a safety razor, more power to ya.  But it's silly to belittle others for their decision to get a necessary and annoying task in the life of a man over with quickly and painlessly.

 

Sunday, February 12, 2012

The Fitness Fallacy

Do me a favor and take a look at these two magazine covers.











The lady on the left is Marisa Miller, a model who has appeared in Victoria's Secret and the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue.  The fella on the right is Owen McKibbin, a former professional beach volleyball player and - according to his website - a "fitness and lifestyle expert."  You may be looking at each of them, depending on your respective gender, and saying to yourself, "Gee, I wish I had that flat stomach and those toned legs," or "Gee, I wish I had those ripped pecs and defined biceps."

Well, I'm here to tell you one thing;  you probably can't.

Or, at least, it's highly unlikely.  We, as a culture, have been force-fed the belief that physiques such as these represent the ideal model for what true fitness is.  It's a goal that any of us can achieve, given the proper discipline, diet plan, and exercise regimen.  And if we don't look exactly like these two models, we are fat, lazy sloths who are destined to die a horribly painful (and embarassing) death due to our inability or unwillingness to shape ourselves into this mold.  New diets emerge on a seemingly daily basis and fancy exercise equipment with all sorts of intricate bells and whistles inundate us through television informercials and advertisements taken out in magazines such as Men's Health and Women's Health.  We are told that, to get abdominals like McKibbin's, all we have to do is eat a healthy diet and exercise regularly.  Most likely, it just ain't gonna happen.

What most people either fail to realize or refuse to acknowledge is that these folks are fitness models.  They are paid handsomely to look the way they do and to maintain these amazing bodies (and this is totally ignoring the rampant photoshopping that takes place in the magazine industry) and it's very unreasonable to possess the expectation that we can achieve similar results.  Sure, if you were to dedicate your life to a highly disciplined fitness regimen you may be able to have six-pack abs and ripped up arms.  But ask anyone who is an ardent fitness fanatic and they'll tell you that a six-pack is incredibly hard to get and maintain. 

A recent workout trend that is sweeping the nation (and, I'm sure, causing agnonizing pain) is P90X.  I don't intend to disparage this regimen whatsoever.  I've heard many people talk at length about the benefits they have gleaned from it, and that is great.  But are you going to do this grueling workout for the rest of your life to maintain that body you've desired for so long?  I believe many people go into routines such as these under the false impression that, once they achieve the physique they've been craving, they can pare down their workouts.  Not a chance.  If you have to workout at this intensity to acquire those gains, you are going to have to work equally hard to maintain them.

Genetics plays a substantial role in one's ability to achieve these results as well.  I have a friend who was an avid mountain biker.  He was the most fit person I have ever met and worked out like a mad man.  He ate a near-perfect diet and lifted weights on a regular basis.  And yet he still complained to me that he couldn't achieve visible abdominals.  For many people, it's just not in the cards.  We look at professional athletes and admire and envy them for their abilities and accomplishments and secretly wish we could do the mind-blowing superhuman feats they do.  Totally ignoring the fact that professional athletes are essentially freaks of nature (and I mean that in a good way), we have to remember that these people, like Owen McKibbin and Marisa Miller, are paid to do what they do and look the way they look.  They have professional trainers who spend hours a day working with them in state-of-the-art training facilities, as well as nutritionsists and dieticians who plan diets specific to that particular athelete's needs and goals.

Often, we look in fitness magazines, and even the slavering celebrity rag mags, and see articles telling us how to "get a butt like Beyonce's" or "a chiseled physique like Hugh Jackman's."  As with the fitness models and professional athletes, these folks have personal trainers and diet planners.  Money is no issue with them, so they are free to hire world-renowned experts to help them look the way they do.  How many young men looked at pictures of Hugh Jackman as the super-mutant, Wolverine, and yearned to have a body like that?  


It's impressive, no doubt, but if one studies the situation a little more closely, one can see the level of dedication required to look like this is far beyond what the average adult male is capable of.  Jackman spent hours per day working out, as well as eating an extremely protein-rich diet.  He had handlers constantly working with him to ensure that every muscle in his body was threatening to burst through his skin. 

Men's Health recently featured an article (and this is a very common occurence in that particular magazine) about Australian actor, Chris Hemsworth who starred in the movie Thor.  Hemsworth spoke at length in the article about what he did to create the body of the god of thunder.  As usual, Men's Health put in its two cents at the end, leading the reader to believe that the workout they outlined in a separate section would, in essence, give you that same massive build.  It's a load of malarkey.  The plan they used was not the same one Hemsworth followed and you won't be able to sculpt that same physique using it.  He had superior genetics, as well (and I don't mean to belabor this point) people pushing him to achieve what was required.  I'm sure the multi-million dollar paycheck didn't hurt much, either.

Fitness or Vanity?

I feel that our celebrity- and media-based culture has pushed us into a mindset that favors exercising and dieting for the sake of vanity, rather than striving for the improvement of our health and well-being.  While it's true that building an "attractive" body that one is proud of can do wonders for one's confidence and self-esteem, the most dignified goal one should be seeking would be one of prolonging one's life and insuring that that lifetime is spent in the most healthful and productive manner possible.  Instead, we have reached a point to where gaining the acceptance of others through fitting into someone else's perceived archetype of what beauty truly is.  We begin each new year resolving to lose weight so that we can look good in a bikini when we go on summer vacation or so we can wash the car shirtless without feeling like the world is chuckling at our paunches.

Don't Put That In Your Mouth!

Many times we make ourselves miserable by following unrealistic goals that require seemingly unnatural eating and exercising habits that ultimately make us feel worse about ourselves.  We're told to only buy organic fruits and vegetables, to only eat farm-raised fish and grass-fed beef.  Advocates of these diet mantras completely ignore the fact that, a.)  it's hard for many of us to find farm-raised fish and grass-fed beef, and b.)  it's expensive.

If you really think about it, most diet plans are concocted by people who are already fairly wealthy and don't have to worry about buying these pricey food products for a family of four.  David Zinczenko, editor-in-chief of Men's Health, wrote a book called The Abs Diet.  This book is chockful of completely useless information that is totally unreasonable and irrational for most individuals, especially those who have families and work nine-to-five jobs.  But Zinczenko pontificates at length about how his diet is so easy to follow and appeals to even the most harried members of society.  Well, not only does the food cost a fortune (You seriously think I'm going to buy organic chocolate milk?  I'm going to buy a gallon of Wal-Mart-brand milk and a bottle of Wal-Mart-brand chocolate syrup if I want chocolate milk).  We're not even considering the fact that my children would likely (definitely) never eat any of these things. Am I supposed to buy food just for myself and buy everyone else completely different food? Am I supposed to purchase fifteen different types of cooking oils to accomodate different dishes? If I had that kind of money, I think I could find something better to spend it on.

Part of the problem we, as a nation, are so overweight (I hate this term. I'll explain why later) is because we have grown so incredibly lazy, not only in our exercise habits, but in our eating habits. Taking a few minutes to fix a simple dinner (and some of them are really simple, believe me) is definitely worth the benefits. One thing that Men's Health does advocate that I agree wholeheartedly with, is that we need to eat our foods as close to their natural state as we can. I believe it goes without saying that we ingest entirely too much heavily processed food in this country, and that is certainly having a detrimental impact on our health.

The emergence of the fast food industry has certainly played a part in the so-called "obesity epidemic" in our country, but the health "experts" out there now believe that we are so incredibly stupid that we can't recognize what is good for us and what will turn our hearts into cholesterol-ridden slag heaps. We have the Yahoo! Health pundits and the Men's Health gestapo admonishing us for EVER eating a cheeseburger or a few slices of greasy pizza. They bombard us incessantly with the number of calories and grams of fat in each dish at our favorite restaurants or fast food joints. In a recent article on Yahoo! Health entitled "The Best and Worst Burgers," the author finishes the list with the "Burger So Bad It Should Be Illegal." She states that this oozing mound of dead cow has 2,290 calories and 139 grams of fat, which, she says, is "211% of the proper daily intake." First of all, "proper daily intake" depends entirely on who is eating it (though this burger would most definitely exceed anyone's daily intake). Second of all, are we so ignorant that we can't look at this monstrous slab of meat and realize that it's not healthy without having some bobble-headed numbskull telling us each and every factoid about its chemical composition?

I recently watched a documentary called Fat Head in which comedian (and former health writer) Tom Naughton tackles many of the issues and misconceptions covered in Morgan Spurlock's unctuous film Supersize Me.  In Fat Head, Naughton subsists on fast food for one month, but makes smarter choices about what he orders, and also walks several miles a week.  At the end of his month of fast food subsistence, he actually lost weight.

At one point, he goes out on the street with a plateful of McDonald's food and carrots and asks people to point out which food items they felt were the most unhealthy.  As expected, every single individual questioned pointed to the McDonald's food.  This probably seems incredibly obvious, but we still frequent websites such as Yahoo! Health to see how bad the foods we eat are.  Is it really necessary, though, that we identify the caloric value and fat content of every single piece of food we put in our mouths?  Men's Health frequently points out "if you eat 'x' number of calories every day, you will gain 'x' number of pounds each year and you'll have to do 'x' amount of exercise to burn it off."  I'm not a believer in counting every calorie you consume.  I suppose if you are training for some type of athletic event, or if you want a physique like the two models at the top of the page, counting calories might be a worthwhile pursuit.  Lance Armstrong used to famously weigh everything he ate.  Once again, he's a professional athlete; we're not.  But for the average person who desires a "normal" body, such obsession is a waste of time.  If one looks at a plate of greasy fried chicken and mashed potatoes smothered in gravy, one can honestly say to one's self "this is probably not healthy so maybe I should limit myself a bit or, at least, not eat it on a daily basis." 

Body Image

Why is it we know more than ever about what constitutes a healthy diet and an adequate exercise regimen, but we're fatter than we've ever been?  Surely, given the limitless information at our fingertips, we should all look like Owen McKibbin and Marisa Miller, right?  Besides the obvious (poor eating habits and lack of exercise), I believe the main reason we are overweight is due to the fact that we are constantly made to feel inadequate.  We see beautiful models and celebrities gracing magazine covers and walking around in nearly non-existent bikinis on television and we become disheartened because we feel that, though we desperately want to, deep down we know that we'll never have the self-discipline or the time to look the way they do.  So we eat . . . and we sit . . . and we take the elevator up two flights of steps . . .and we sit and wait for someone to load their groceries in their trunk, return their shopping cart, and drive away so we can nab their parking space (completely ignoring the fact that we could've already parked farther away and already been inside the store shopping).  I blame much of our sedentery behavior on modern technology, but I'll tackle that issue in another blog.

But some people take it to another extreme, as evidenced by the number of young women (and some men) suffering from eating disorders like anorexia nervosa and bulimia (though I doubt it's reached the epidemic proportions the media would lead you to believe).  This false sense that beauty is only reflected in your body fat percentage has given rise to a whole generation who believe that those who are "overweight" are useless burdens on society whose very existence threatens all the resplendent folks they idolize.  As I stated above, our belief on this subject is purely a matter of vanity instead of what is best for our overall health. 

Fifty years ago, Marilyn Monroe was (and still is) the penultimate sex symbol.  She would likely be considered fat by today's standards.  Christina Hendricks from the television show Mad Men is often discussed because of her weight.  Here she is compared to Megan Fox, who possesses a more "modern" body type.


      









Personally, I find the body type on the left much more attractive.  The bony, emaciated frame of Megan Fox simply does not look feminine in my mind.  However, the ball has been set rolling by television and media, and someone who possesses a figure like Christina Hendricks is seen as the outcast. 

I mentioned earlier that I dislike the term "overweight" because it implies that weight is a meaningful measure of one's health and fitness.  It's not.  Most studies being done now confirm the fact that a person who is "overweight" and exercises on a regular basis is considerably more fit than a skinny person who leads a sedentery lifestyle.  Plus, one's weight does not reflect the muscle mass that person possesses.  Arnold Schwarzenegger, at the height of his bodybuilding career, weighed in at 250 pounds and was 6'2".  His body-fat percentage was estimated at approximately 8%.  According to most modern ideal weight charts, this put him at about seventy pounds overweight.  So weight, obviously, cannot be used to judge a person's health or fitness level because there are far too many other factors to consider that don't incorporate the simple weight of one's body.

Conclusion

I'm no expert on this subject.  I could certainly make many lifestyle changes of my own to make myself more fit, so I don't want to sound preachy.  My main concern is that we've abandoned our common sense about a very sensitive subject that deserves to be reexamined so that others don't sink into the false notion that we can achieve results like those whose very livelihood depends on being a living representation of Michelangelo's David

Clearly our country has a health problem that needs to be addressed, but it's up to each individual to make those decisions for themselves without the constant barrage of misinformation and misleading statistics that cloud our judgement and render us helpless to improve our lives.  We have to let go of the idea that our weight and the presence of a six-pack somehow determines our worth as human beings, and instead focus on improving our health, whether that means having bulging biceps or not. 

And just for good measure, here's a better picture of Christina Hendricks...


At least, I think it's better.
     

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Greatest Defensive Players

Now that I've completed this lengthy list, I'd like to conclude it by puting forth my all-defensive team, the ten best players at each respective position.  I'm not going to have a lengthy write-up for each of these players because it would take too much time, and many of them have already been written about it in the previous posts. 

Left Field                                                          Center Field
1.)  Barry Bonds                                               1.)  Willie Mays
2.)  Ted Williams                                               2.)  Ken Griffey, Jr.
3.)  Stan Musial                                                 3.)  Joe DiMaggio
4.)  Rickey Henderson                                       4.)  Mickey Mantle
5.)  Pete Rose                                                    5.)  Duke Snider
6.)  Manny Ramirez                                            6.)  Kirby Puckett
7.)  Carl Yastrzemski                                          7.)  Jimmy Wynn 
8.)  Lou Brock                                                    8.)  Dale Murphy
9.)  Willie Stargell                                                9.)  Larry Doby
10.) Goose Goslin                                               10.) Fred Lynn

Right Field                                                           Third Base
1.)  Hank Aaron                                                  1.)  Mike Schmidt
2.)  Babe Ruth                                                     2.)  Brooks Robinson
3.)  Frank Robinson                                             3.)  Eddie Matthews
4.)  Roberto Clemente                                          4.)  George Brett
5.)  Shoeless Joe Jackson                                     5.)  Wade Boggs
6.)  Tony Gwynn                                                  6.)  Alex Rodriguez
7.)  Ichiro Suzuki                                                  7.)  Chipper Jones
8.)  Reggie Jackson                                               8.)  Stan Hack
9.)  Al Kaline                                                        9.)  Ron Santo 
10.) Dave Winfield                                               10.) Ray Dandridge

Shortstop                                                              Second Base
1.)  Ernie Banks                                                    1.)  Eddie Collins
2.)  Cal Ripken, Jr.                                                2.)  Joe Morgan
3.)  Derek Jeter                                                     3.)  Charlie Gehringer
4.)  Ozzie Smith                                                     4.)  Jackie Robinson
5.)  Joe Cronin                                                       5.)  Roberto Alomar
6.)  Barry Larkin                                                    6.)  Craig Biggio
7.)  Robin Yount                                                    7.)  Ryne Sandberg
8.)  Omar Vizquel                                                  8.)  Lou Whitaker
9.)  Nomar Garciaparra                                         9.)  Jeff Kent
10.) Jimmy Rollins                                                 10.) Bobby Grich

First Base                                                              Catcher
1.)  Lou Gehrig                                                      1.)  Johnny Bench
2.)  Jimmie Foxx                                                    2.)  Ivan Rodriguez
3.)  Hank Greenberg                                              3.)  Yogi Berra
4.)  Eddie Murray                                                  4.)  Roy Campanella
5.)  Mark McGwire                                               5.)  Mike Piazza
6.)  Willie McCovey                                              6.)  Carlton Fisk
7.)  Jeff Bagwell                                                     7.)  Bill Dickey
8.)  Harmon Killebrew                                           8.)  Gary Carter
9.)  Albert Pujols                                                   9.)  Joe Torre
10.) Jim Thome                                                     10.) Jorge Posada

Pitcher
1.)  Roger Clemens
2.)  Sandy Koufax
3.)  Greg Maddux
4.)  Randy Johnson
5.)  Tom Seaver
6.)  Steve Carlton
7.)  Bob Gibson
8.)  Pedro Martinez
9.)  Nolan Ryan
10.) Walter Johnson

By the way, I realize that all of my numbers are uneven.  For some reason, they're straight while I'm writing this, but once it shows up on the main page, they're all crooked.  Go figure.

Thursday, April 7, 2011

#1 - Roger Clemens (1962- )

"Rocket"



















Teams:
Boston Red Sox (1984-1996)
Toronto Blue Jays (1997-1998)
New York Yankees (1999-2003)
Houston Astros (2004-2006)
New York Yankees (2007)

Career Statistics:
W-L:  354-184
W-L %:  .658
ERA:  3.12
Strikeouts:  4,672
BB:  1,580
CG:  118
SHO:  46
IP:  4,916.2
WHIP:  1.173

William Roger Clemens was born in Dayton, Ohio.  His parents divorced when he was still an infant, and his mother ended up marrying a man named Woody Booher, whom Clemens always considered to be his father.  Booher died when Roger was nine years old.  He lived in Vandalia, Ohio until 1977 and then spent most of his years in high school in Houston, Texas.  He attended Dulles High School where starred in basketball and football.  The Philadelphia Phillies and Minnesota Twins scouted him, but he opted to go to college instead.  He began pitching for San Jacinto College North in 1981, where he went 9-2.  The New York Mets drafted him in the 12th round of the 1981 Major League Baseball Draft, but he did not sign with them.  Instead, he transferred to the University of Texas, putting up a 25-7 record and helped the Longhorns win the 1983 College World Series.

Clemens was drafted 19th overall by the Boston Red Sox in 1983 and rose through the minor league system quickly.  He made his major league debut on May 15, 1984.  In his rookie season, he went an impressive 9-4 with a 4.32 ERA, and 126 strikeouts.  He remained steady in '85 with a 7-5 record, a 3.29 ERA, but only 74 strikeouts.  He had a breakout season in 1986, going 24-4 with a 2.48 ERA and 239 strikeouts.  On April 29, he struck out 20 Seattle Mariners in nine innings, which remains a record (though it has been tied by Kerry Wood and Randy Johnson).  His performance helped guide the Red Sox to the World Series, though they lost 4-3 to the New York Mets.  He also won his first of a record seven Cy Young Awards, as well as the American League MVP.  Clemens attributes his success beginning with this season to the short period of time Tom Seaver spent with the Sox in 1986.

He continued his dominance in '87, going 20-9 with a 2.97 ERA and 256 strikeouts, as well as winning his second Cy Young.  He remained consistent through the rest of his career with Boston, going 132-89 with a 3.13 ERA and 1,896 strikeouts.  He won his third Cy Young in 1991.  On September 18, 1996, Clemens again struck out 20 batters in a game, this time against the Detroit Tigers.  It was his third-to-last game as a member of the Boston Red Sox. 

Following the 1996 season, the Sox opted to not resign Clemens, with the general manager Dan Duquette remarking that Roger was in the twilight of his career (at the ripe old age of 33).  He then signed a four-year deal with the Toronto Blue Jays.  His numbers were amazing during his two seasons with the Blue Jays, posting a 21-7 record in 1997 with a 2.05 ERA and 292 strikeouts, and a 20-6 record with a 2.65 ERA and 271 strikeouts in '98.  He won his fourth and fifth Cy Young Awards with the Jays, as well as earning the pitcher's Triple Crown each season. 

Clemens was traded to the New York Yankees before the 1999 season, and his contribution was evident immediately.  In '99, he posted a 14-10 record with a 4.60 ERA, and 163 strikeouts.  He helped lead the Yanks to World Series victories in '99 and '00.  During his time with the Yankees, he posted a 83-42 record with a 4.01 ERA, and 1,014 strikeouts.  In 2001, he won his sixth Cy Young Award.  After the 2003 season, at the age of 41, he announced his retirement. 

On January 12, 2004, Clemens decided to un-retire and signed a one-year deal with his hometown Houston Astros.  He had a stellar first season with the Astros, racking up a 18-4 record with a 2.98 ERA and 218 strikeouts, winning his seventh and final Cy Young.  His 2005 season was arguably even better, though his record did not show it.  His record was 13-8, but he posted the lowest ERA of his career, 1.87.  Unfortunately, he ranked near 30th in the league in run support.  He helped guide the Astros to the World Series in 2005, but performed poorly, though it was later discovered that he had been suffering from a hamstring injury since September.  The Astros ended up being swept in the Fall Classic by the Chicago White Sox.  After the 2005 season, he again retired (albeit unofficially), but was again added to the Astros lineup halfway through the 2006 season.  Again, his numbers didn't give an accurate portrayal of his performance.  He finished up the season with a 7-6 record, a 2.30 ERA, and 102 strikeouts in 19 games played.  The following season, Clemens signed a one-year deal to return to the New York Yankees, but his performance was lackluster, posting a 6-6 record with a 4.18 ERA, and 68 strikeouts.  His final appearance was September 16, 2007.

Like Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens has fallen under considerably scrutiny in recent years in dealing with alleged steroid usage.  However, like Bonds, I don't feel that the matter of whether or not he using PED's should have an effect on his legacy.  What benefits could steroids have given Roger Clemens?  I feel that muscular endurance would've been the only benefit.  Clemens was already a flamethrower when he was in his early twenties.  It's not as though he suddenly began throwing 100-mph fastballs after spending most of his career only throwing 94.  And what of longevity?  True, steroids may have aided him in staying properous in the league for so long, but what about Nolan Ryan?  He retired at the age of 45, still topping 100-mph with his pitches.  It seems fairly safe to say that Nolan Ryan wasn't using steroids.   

In Jose Canseco's book Juiced, he stated that he believed that Clemens was using PED's due to the improvements in his game after he left Boston.  But let's compare those numbers.  His record was 192-111 during thirteen seasons in Boston, which gave him a .634 winning percentage.  His ERA was 3.06 and his strikeout total of 2,590 strikeouts.  This gave him an average of 199.23 strikeouts per year.  After leaving the Sox (during his time with the Blue Jays, Yankees, and Astros), his record was 162-73, giving him a .689 winning percentage during those eleven seasons.  He had an ERA of 2.91 during that time with 2,082 strikeouts.  This gave him an average of 189.27 strikeouts per year.  Granted, the winning percentage is fairly considerable, but it also has to be noted that the Red Sox record during his years with them was 1062-978, which gave them a .521 winning percentage.  They barely won half their games when he pitched for them.  But during the years he spent with the Blue Jays, the Yankees, and the Astros, those teams went a combined 1,005-773, giving those teams a .565 winning percentage, which would explain Clemens's own improvement. 

So, his winning percentage increased after he joined teams that were contenders, his ERA decreased slightly from just over three runs per game to slightly under three runs per game.  He actually averaged 9.96 fewer strikeouts per season during his years with those teams.  This is not to mention the fact that steroids could not have given him the control that he exhibited during his career.

Clemens also had a reputation as being a jerk (again, like Bonds), once complaining about having to carry his own luggage through an airport.  He was also known as a headhunter when pitching, though he leveled off a bit during his career.  One of the most well-known incidents occured in 2000 when Clemens and the Yankees were facing Mike Piazza and the Mets.  Piazza was batting when Clemens drilled him in the head with a fastball, causing a concussion.  The two teams met again during the World Series that year.  During Game 2, Piazza fouled off a pitch from Clemens that broke his bat.  The shard flew toward the pitcher's mound, where Clemens picked it up and hurled it in Piazza's direction as he was running to first.  Both benches cleared, but things were settled down before any fights could break out. 

So, Clemens may have not been the most pleasant guy in the league and he may have exhibited diva-ish behavior with his constant retirements and un-retirements, but there is little doubt that no other pitcher was dominant for longer or with more consistentcy than Roger Clemens.

#2 - Sandy Koufax (1935- )

"The Man with the Golden Arm"

















Teams:
Brooklyn/Los Angeles Dodgers (1955-1966)

Career Statistics:
W-L:  165-87
W-L %:  0.654
ERA:  2.76
Strikeouts:  2,396
BB:  817
CG:  137
SHO:  40
IP:  2,324.1
WHIP:  1.106

Sanford Braun was born in Brooklyn, New York to a Jewish family and raised in Borough Park.  His parents divorced when he was three, and his mother remarried a man named Irving Koufax when he was nine.  He attended Brooklyn's Lafayette High School where he excelled in basketball more than baseball.  He attended the University of Cincinnati and walked on to the freshman basketball team.  In spring 1954, he made the baseball varsity team.  That year he went 3-1 with 51 strikeouts and 30 walks.  Koufax tried out for the Brooklyn Dodgers and the Pittsburgh Pirates.  During his Pirates try-out, he broke the thumb of the team's bullpen coach, Branch Rickey.  Rickey went on to say that Koufax had the best arm of anyone he had ever seen.  Dodgers scout Al Campanis heard about Koufax from the owner of a sporting goods store, and later went out to see him pitch.  Campanis then invited him to Ebbets Field for a try-out, and later said, "There are two times in my life the hair on my arms has stood up.  The first time I saw the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and the first time I saw Sandy Koufax throw a fastball."  Soon after, the Dodgers signed him to a contract.

Koufax made his major league debut (as a reliever) on June 24, 1955 against the Milwaukee Braves, though it was a forgettable outing.  He finally made his first start on July 6, but lasted only 4 2/3 innings and gave up eight walks.  He didn't make another start until August 27, when he threw a two-hit complete game shut-out against the Cincinnati Reds.  His only other win that season was also a shut-out, though his total numbers for the year were subpar (28 walks to 30 strikeouts).  The Dodgers won the World Series that year, but Koufax did not pitch. 

Koufax's 1956 season wasn't much of an improvement and he was still exhibiting control problems.  He only pitched 58.7 innings with a 4.91 ERA walking 29 and striking out 30.  In anticipation of the 1957 season, the Dodgers sent Koufax to Puerto Rico to play winter ball.  In his first start, against the Chicago Cubs, he struck out 13 and pitched a complete game.  He won three of his next five starts with a 2.90 ERA, but didn't get another start for 45 days.  In his next start, he struck out 11 in seven innings, but ended up with a no-decision. 

Over the next three seasons, Koufax was hobbled with injuries.  In 1958, he came out to a 7-3 start, but ended up injuring his ankle and finished the season 11-11, while leading the National League in wild pitches.  In June 1959, Koufax struck out 16 batters in one game, which was a record for a night game.  On August 31, he struck out 18 batters.  His Dodgers made it to the World Series against the Chicago White Sox that year, but they ended up losing.  After the season, Koufax requested to be traded because he wasn't getting enough playing time.  By the end of 1960, after going 8-13, Koufax considered quitting to devote himself to an electronics company he'd invested in.  After the end of the '60 season, Koufax threw his gloves and cleats in the trash, though they were retrieved by the clubhouse supervisor.

Koufax entered the 1961 season determined to give it a try for one more year.  He showed up in better shape than he had been in years, deciding to find out just how good he could be.  He was also convinced to make some changes to his windup and delivery, which bore immediate dividends.  Nineteen sixty-one was his breakout season, going 18-13 with 269 strikeouts and a 3.52 ERA.  On June 30, 1962 against the New York Mets, Koufax threw his first no-hitter.  He continued with a strong season, despite injuring his pitching hand.  After being hit with a pitch, his left index finger had turned cold, numb, and white.  He was performing well, though, so he ignored the problem.  But by July, his entire hand was becoming numb and he soon had to seek treatment as it was beginning to affect his performance.  He visited a vascular specialist who suspected that Koufax had a crushed artery in his hand.  Ten days of experimental medicine successfully reopened the artery.  He finished the season 14-7 with a 2.54 ERA and 216 strikeouts, but his Dodgers lost in the pennant race to the San Francisco Giants that season.

On May 11, 1963, Koufax took a perfect game into the eighth inning against the Giants, and still ended up with a no-hitter.  He ended up winning the pitcher's Triple Crown that season with a 25-5 record, a 1.88 ERA, and 306 strikeouts.  He pitched eleven shutouts, won the NL MVP Award, and the Cy Young Award.  While not to diminish from his amazing achievements, the fact that the strike zone was expanded before the '63 season helped contribute partly to his success.  The Dodgers took on the New York Yankees in the World Series that season.  In Game 1, Koufax faced Whitey Ford, striking out 15 batters.  After the game, Yankees catcher Yogi Berra said (in one his few quotes that actually made sense), "I can see how he won 25 games.  What I don't understand is how he lost five."  Koufax completed the sweep of the Dodgers in Game 4 with another win over Ford.  Koufax was named series MVP.

On April 22, 1964, Koufax said he felt something "let go" inside his arm.  He missed three starts and ended up getting three cortisone shots in his elbow.  On June 4, Koufax, pitching against the Phillies, threw his third no-hitter in three years.  It would have been a complete game, except for the fact that Koufax walked Richie Allen in the fourth inning.  In August, while diving back into second base against a pickoff attempt, Koufax jammed his pitching arm.  He was able to pitch two more games, but after the last (a 13-K shutout), he was not able to straighten his arm.  The team's physician diagnosed him with traumatic arthritis.  He ended the season 19-5 with a 1.74 ERA and 223 strikeouts. 

On March 31, 1965, after pitching a complete spring training game, Koufax awoke to find his arm had turned completely black and blue.  He visited again with the team's doctor who told him that he would be lucky to pitch once a week, and may eventually lose the use of his arm.  He cautioned Koufax against pitching in-between starts, a resolution which he was not able to keep for very long.  He began taking Empirin with codeine before (and sometimes during) games and took other medications for inflammation.  On September 9, Koufax pitched his first (and only) perfect game, against the Chicago Cubs.  What is interesting to note about this game is that Cubs pitcher, Bob Hendley pitched a one-hitter and only allowed two runners to reach base.  Both pitchers had no-hitters going into the seventh inning. 

In spite of the constant pain he was in, Koufax won another pitcher's Triple Crown, going 26-8 with a 2.04 ERA and 382 strikeouts (a record, until broken by Nolan Ryan's 383 in 1973).  The Dodgers made it to the World Series once again, with Koufax famously declining to pitch Game 1 because of his observance of Yom Kippur.  However, his team won the title again, with Koufax being named World Series MVP for the second time.

In April 1966, the team's physician told Koufax he needed to retire because his arm wouldn't be able to hold out for another season.  Koufax kept the advice to himself and still pitched every fourth day.  He pitched 323 innings and had a 27-9 record, a 1.73 ERA, and 317 strikeouts.  His Dodgers beat the Phillies on the last day of the regular season to win the pennant, though they were later swept in the World Series by the Baltimore Orioles.  Shortly after, Koufax announced his retirement due to the arthritis in his arm.  He had played only twelve seasons.

In 1967, Koufax signed a ten-year contract to be a broadcaster on the Saturday Game of the Week on NBC.  He gave up the position after six years.  In 1972, his first year of eligibility, he was elected to the Hall of Fame.  The Dodgers hired Koufax as a minor league pitching coach in 1979, a position he held until 1990.  He broke ties with the Dodgers after The New York Post (which, like the Dodgers, was part of Rupert Murdoch's business empire) ran a piece in 2003 inferring that Koufax was gay.  When the Dodgers were sold to Frank McCourt in 2004, he returned to the organization.  On May 27, 2010 Koufax was included among a group of prominent Jewish Americans at a White House reception to honor Jewish American Heritage.  Koufax got the largest ovation of anyone attending.  Currently, he serves as a member of the advisory board of the Baseball Assistance Team, an organization dedicated to helping former baseball players who have fallen on hard times financially or medically.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

#3 - Greg Maddux (1966- )

"Mad Dog"  "The Professor"



















Teams:
Chicago Cubs (1986-1992)
Atlanta Braves (1993-2003)
Chicago Cubs (2004-2006)
Los Angeles Dodgers (2006)
San Diego Padres (2007-2008)
Los Angeles Dodgers (2008)

Career Statistics:
W-L:  355-227
W-L %:  .609
ERA:  3.16
Strikeouts:  3,371
BB:  999
CG:  109
SHO:  35
IP:  5,008.1
WHIP:  1.143

Gregory Alan Maddux was born in San Angelo, Texas, but ended up spending much of his childhood in Madrid, Spain where the Air Force had stationed his father.  Upon returning to the U.S. (Las Vegas), Greg and his brother, Mike trained under Rusty Medar, a former major league scout.  He preached control and placement over velocity and power.  Even though Maddux had a successful high school career, he did not receive any athletic scholarship offers.  So he instead declared himself eligible for the Major League Draft in 1984, and was picked up by the Chicago Cubs.

Maddux made his major league debut in September 1986.  He was put in as a pinch runner in the 17th inning of a game against the Houston Astros, and came in to pitch in the 18th.  He gave up a home run to Billy Hatcher and took the loss.  His next outing was a complete game victory.  He finished his short first season with a 2-4 record, a 5.52 ERA, and 20 strikeouts.  He struggled the next season as well, finishing with a 6-14 record and a 5.61 ERA.  Nineteen eighty-eight was his season to break out, with a 18-8 record and a 3.18 ERA.  This would be the first of 17 straight seasons in which Maddux would win at least 15 games.  In 1989, he had a record of 19-12, a 2.95 ERA, and 135 strikeouts.  He remained somewhat unsteady during 1990 and 1991, going 15-15 and 15-11, respectively.  However, in '92, Maddux had a stellar season, going 20-11, with a 2.18 ERA, and 199 strikeouts, and won his first NL Cy Young Award. 

Maddux entered into free agency after the '92 season, and after negotiations turned contentious with the Cubs, he signed with the Atlanta Braves.  In his first game in a Braves uniform, he defeated his former team 1-0.  He led the NL in ERA (2.36) and posted a 20-10 record.  He won his second Cy Young and helped Atlanta (along with pitchers John Smoltz, Tom Glavine, and Steve Avery) to the NLCS, but ultimately lost to the Phillies.  In the strike-shortened 1994 season, Maddux had an ERA of 1.56, the second lowest since Bob Gibson's record 1.12 in 1968, when the pitcher's mound was lowered.  He also led the National League in wins (16), and innings pitched (202).  He would go on to win his third Cy Young.

Maddux had an amazing season in 1995, with a 19-2 record with a 1.63 ERA.  On May 28, he lost a no-hitter in the eighth inning.  Through June and July, he pitched 51 consecutive innings without giving up a walk.  He helped lead the Braves to the World Series, where they eventually beat the Cleveland Indians 4-2.  He would win his fourth Cy Young for the '95 season.

On July 22, 1997, Maddux pitched a complete game against the Cubs with just 76 pitches.  Three weeks prior, he had thrown a complete game against the New York Yankees on 84 pitches, and five days before that, he'd defeated the Phillies on 90 pitches.  He allowed just 20 walks in 1997, six of which were intentional.  Barring those intentional walks, Maddux only went to a 3-0 count one time the entire season.  He went into a minor slump towards the end of '97 (his ERA had been 1.65 throughout much of the season), but he still managed a 2.22 ERA, which was the lowest in the NL.  Only an amazing season by Pedro Martinez prevented him from winning another Cy Young Award. 

In 1998, Maddux struck out 200+ batters for the first and only time in his career.  He finished 18-9 with a 2.22 ERA.  In September 2000, he pitched a streak of 40 1/3 scoreless innings. 

Prior to the 2004 season, Maddux re-signed with the Cubs as a free agent.  On August 7, he gathered his 300th win, against the San Francisco Giants.  Maddux pitched poorly in 2005, posting his first losing record since 1987.  His second stint with the Cubs last until 2006, when he was traded to the Los Angeles Dodgers.  He finished the '06 season 15-14 with a 4.20 ERA and only 117 strikeouts. 

On December 5, 2006, Maddux agreed to a one-year contract with the San Diego Padres.  He was 14-11 with the Padres in '07, with a 4.14 ERA, and 104 strikeouts.  On August 19, 2008, Maddux was traded back to the Dodgers.  In December, he announced his retirement.

More than anything, Greg Maddux was known for his exceptional control, pitch movement, and placement.  His fastball rarely exceeded 90 mph, and he was certainly not an imposing presence on the mound.  He didn't strike out a lot of batters, but instead relied on placing pitches in such a way to induce ground balls.  He was an incredibly intelligent pitcher who had the ability to outwit his opponent, and an exceptional memory about how certain batters hit.  Few pitchers have ever made greater use of the outside corner of the plate than Maddux (though at times, it resulted in some questionable calls by the umpire).  Hall of Famer Wade Boggs once said, "It seems like he's inside your mind with you.  When he knows you're not going to swing, he throws a straight one.  He sees into the future.  It's like he has a crystal ball hidden inside his glove."  Former Braves catcher (and now bullpen coach) Eddie Perez related a story about how Maddux once intentionally gave up a home run to Astros's slugger Jeff Bagwell because he knew that he would be facing Bagwell in the playoffs later on.  He felt that Bagwell would expect the same pitch that he allowed him to hit out of the park and Maddux would refuse to throw it to him.  Maddux was once asked what the most memorable at-bat of his pitching career was, and he said that it was striking out Dave Martinez to end a regular season game.  The interviewer assumed Maddux would've mentioned one of his many playoff experiences, but Maddux said, "I remember that one because he got a hit off me in the same situation (full count, bases loaded, two out in the 9th inning) seven years earlier.  I told myself if I ever got in the same situation, I'll pitch him differently.  It took me seven years, but I got him." 

Maddux never walked more than 82 batters in any season of his career.  In 2001, he set a National League record by going 72 1/3 innings without walking a batter.  His fielding was also exceptional, and he ended up with 18 Gold Gloves, which is a record for a pitcher. 

Though he was often dismissive of his own reputation, it is clear there has never been a more clever pitcher to play the game of baseball.   

#4 - Randy Johnson (1963- )

"The Big Unit"



















Teams:
Montreal Expos (1988-1989)
Seattle Mariners (1989-1998)
Houston Astros (1998)
Arizona Diamondbacks (1999-2004)
New York Yankees (2005-2006)
Arizona Diamondbacks (2007-2008)
San Francisco Giants (2009)

Career Statistics:
W-L:  303-166
W-L %:  .650
ERA:  3.29
Strikeouts:  4,875
BB:  1,497
CG:  100
SHO:  37
IP:  4,135.1
WHIP:  1.171

Randall David Johnson was born in Walnut Creek, California and attended Livermore High School, where he starred in baseball and basketball.  As a senior, he struck out 121 batters in 66 innings pitched, and threw a perfect game in his final high school start.  He went on to play for the USC Trojan under legendary coach Rod Dedeaux, but he sometimes exhibited control issues.

His control problems followed him to the major leagues where was drafted by the Montreal Expos with the 65th pick overall in the second round of the 1985 Major League Baseball Draft.  He only managed a 3-4 record during his time with the Expos, and was traded to the Seattle Mariners in the 1989 season.  He proceeded to lead the American League in walks for three straight seasons (1990-1992), and in hit batsmen in '92 and '93.  On two separate occasions in 1991 and 1992, he walked 10 batters during 4 innings of work.

However, he showed flashes of his untapped potential, pitching a no-hitter against the Detroit Tigers, losing a no-hitter in the ninth inning of a game against the Oakland Athletics in 1991, and striking out Wade Boggs three times in a game.  He often states that working with Nolan Ryan helped him with his control issues, as Ryan didn't want Johnson to take as long to figure certain things out as he did.

He had a breakout year in 1993, with a 19-8 record and a 3.24 ERA and 308 strikeouts.  In May 1993, he once again lost a no-hitter in the ninth inning against the Oakland A's.  In 1995, Johnson won the AL Cy Young Award, posting an 18-2 record, 2.48 ERA, and 294 strikeouts.  His .900 winning percentage that season was the second highest in AL history.  Johnson was confined to the dugout through much of the 1996 season due to a back injury, but rebounded quickly in '97 with a 20-4 record, 2.28 ERA, and 291 strikeouts.  On both June 24 and August 8, Johnson struck out 19 batters in a single game.  His statistics the following season were subpar (9-10 with a 4.33 ERA).  On July 31, the Mariners traded Johnson to the Houston Astros.

Johnson's season picked up after arriving in Houston.  For the rest of the season, he posted a 10-1 record, a 1.28 ERA, and 116 strikeouts.  Though he helped the Astros reach the NLDS that season, they did not provide him with any run support in the two games he pitched in the series, and they ended up losing to the San Diego Padres.  In 1999, Johnson signed a four-year contract with the Arizona Diamondbacks, a second-year franchise.  It immediately paid dividends, as he posted a 17-9 record, 2.48 ERA, and 364 strikeouts, won the NL Cy Young, and led his team to the NLDS (though they were defeated by the New York Mets).  In 2000, Johnson finished with a 19-7 record, 347 strikeouts, and a 2.64 ERA, and won his third Cy Young.

On May 8, 2001, Johnson struck out 20 batters in a single game, though he has not been credited with tying the record due to the fact that the game went into extra innings.  However, all of his strikeouts occurred in the first nine innings of the game.  Randy Johnson and teammate Curt Schilling led the Diamondbacks to their first ever World Series in 2001, and ended up defeating the Yankees 4-3.  Johnson and Schilling were awarded co-World Series MVP's, with Johnson winning the NL Cy Young.

In 2002, Johnson won the pitching Triple Crown, posting a 24-5 record with a 2.32 ERA, and 334 strikeouts, and won his fourth consecutive Cy Young.  It was also his fourth consecutive season with 300 or more strikeouts.  Johnson spent most of the 2003 season on the disabled list and was largely ineffective in the few starts he did manage.  In 2004, Johnson had another dominating season, though his 16-14 record did not necessarily reflect it.  He did manage a 2.60 ERA and 290 strikeouts, but his team was not able to offer him much run support.  On May 18, 2004, he recorded his first perfect game (17th in history) in a 2-0 win over the Atlanta Braves.

On January 6, 2005, Johnson was traded to the New York Yankees.  He struggled through the first half of his first season with the Yanks, but regained his composure and ended up with a 17-8 record, a 3.79 ERA, and 211 strikeouts.  The 2006 season was more of the same, with Johnson faltering in the first half, but making a comeback towards the end of the season.  His final tally for 2006 was 17-11, a 5.00 ERA, and 172 strikeouts.  It was later revealed that Johnson had been suffering with a herniated disc in his back.

On January 5, 2007, at Johnson's request, the Yankees traded him back to the Diamondbacks so that he could be nearer his family (his brother had just died).  Since he was rehabbing his back, Johnson did not make his first start until April 24, 2007.  His first start was shaky, but he gradually regained his form before reinjuring his back on July 3.  He then had season-ending surgery to remove the offending disc.  He had a subpar season in 2008 with a 11-10 and an ERA of  3.91.

On December 26, 2008, Johnson was traded to the San Francisco Giants.  On June 4, 2009, Johnson won his 300th ballgame.  However, his injury woes continued as he was placed on the disabled list July 28, 2009 because of a torn rotator cuff.  He finished the season with an 8-6 record, a 4.88 ERA, and 86 strikeouts.  On January 5, 2010, Johnson announced his retirement.  He and his wife and children live in Paradise Valley, Arizona.